Reply
Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 68
  1. #1
    Banned Iceman1800's Avatar
    Join Date: Jul 2003
    Location: Under your bed, Swaziland
    Posts: 37,652
    Rep Power: 0
    Iceman1800 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Iceman1800 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Iceman1800 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Iceman1800 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Iceman1800 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Iceman1800 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Iceman1800 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Iceman1800 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Iceman1800 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Iceman1800 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Iceman1800 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000)
    Iceman1800 is offline

    Hypertrophy and frequency study

    Reply With Quote

  2. #2
    Registered User ashhabah89's Avatar
    Join Date: Apr 2013
    Age: 32
    Posts: 331
    Rep Power: 290
    ashhabah89 will become famous soon enough. (+50) ashhabah89 will become famous soon enough. (+50) ashhabah89 will become famous soon enough. (+50) ashhabah89 will become famous soon enough. (+50) ashhabah89 will become famous soon enough. (+50) ashhabah89 will become famous soon enough. (+50) ashhabah89 will become famous soon enough. (+50) ashhabah89 will become famous soon enough. (+50) ashhabah89 will become famous soon enough. (+50) ashhabah89 will become famous soon enough. (+50) ashhabah89 will become famous soon enough. (+50)
    ashhabah89 is offline
    My life was a lie
    Reply With Quote

  3. #3
    Moderator SuffolkPunch's Avatar
    Join Date: Jan 2007
    Location: Suffolk, United Kingdom (Great Britain)
    Posts: 53,419
    Rep Power: 1332114
    SuffolkPunch has the mod powerz SuffolkPunch has the mod powerz SuffolkPunch has the mod powerz SuffolkPunch has the mod powerz SuffolkPunch has the mod powerz SuffolkPunch has the mod powerz SuffolkPunch has the mod powerz SuffolkPunch has the mod powerz SuffolkPunch has the mod powerz SuffolkPunch has the mod powerz SuffolkPunch has the mod powerz
    SuffolkPunch is offline
    Link doesn't work for me (maybe firewall issue) - is this the Kreiger one from the other day?
    Reply With Quote

  4. #4
    temporary illusion supramax's Avatar
    Join Date: Mar 2014
    Posts: 5,523
    Rep Power: 33913
    supramax has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) supramax has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) supramax has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) supramax has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) supramax has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) supramax has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) supramax has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) supramax has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) supramax has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) supramax has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) supramax has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000)
    supramax is offline
    Originally Posted by SuffolkPunch View Post
    Link doesn't work for me (maybe firewall issue) - is this the Kreiger one from the other day?
    It begins: "Physical Activity, Health and Exercise
    How many times per week should a muscle be trained to maximize muscle hypertrophy? A systematic review and meta-analysis of studies examining the effects of resistance training frequency
    Brad Jon Schoenfeld, Jozo Grgic & James Krieger"

    ... and concludes: "there is strong evidence that resistance training frequency does not significantly or meaningfully impact muscle hypertrophy when volume is equated. Thus, for a given training volume, individuals can choose a weekly frequency per muscle groups based on personal preference."
    Now there are short and simple exercises which tire the body rapidly, and so save our time; and time is something of which we ought to keep strict account. These exercises are running, brandishing weights, and jumping…. Select for practice any one of these, and you will find it plain and easy. But whatever you do, come back soon from body to mind.

    Seneca, Moral Epistles
    Reply With Quote

  5. #5
    my non-edited 'before'pic etet1919's Avatar
    Join Date: Sep 2018
    Posts: 3,867
    Rep Power: 41272
    etet1919 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) etet1919 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) etet1919 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) etet1919 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) etet1919 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) etet1919 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) etet1919 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) etet1919 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) etet1919 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) etet1919 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) etet1919 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000)
    etet1919 is offline
    I say mix it up- get the best of both worlds for a bodybuilder. Just like these experts agree with each other, people should work in different rep ranges, so why not also experiment with once/twice a week equated volume for muscle groups? See what feels and works better for an individual- and that will fluctuate for the same individual.
    Reply With Quote

  6. #6
    Banned rereeea's Avatar
    Join Date: Dec 2018
    Age: 51
    Posts: 19
    Rep Power: 0
    rereeea is on a distinguished road. (+10)
    rereeea is offline
    The study says that when volume is equated then training a muscle once a week is the same as training it 3 times a week or even more.

    That's the problem, everytime they mention equal volume, it's a strong point to be taken into consideration.

    It's way easier to do 5 sets of bench press spread on 3 days than doing 15 sets of bench press in one day if it's even possible.

    To make equal volume feasible for the people in the experiment they started off with small volumes. But when training once a week it is difficult to achieve decent volume (20 sets or more) but when training 3 or more times a week then doing 20 sets or more spread across the week is pretty easy and shouldn't take more than 1 hour of working out.

    Also Bret contreras in the podcast with Jeff Nippard mentions a study showing that for people who train a muscle group only once a week it is overkill to do more than 6 sets per session and causes muscle loss, the study was 6 months long.

    But many studies show that when volume is spread evenly across the week, then muscle loss doesn't happen but instead greater volumes only grant greater muscular growth. See norwegien frequency project and all the studies done by Brad Schoenfeld and Krieger.
    Last edited by rereeea; 12-19-2018 at 01:08 PM.
    Reply With Quote

  7. #7
    my non-edited 'before'pic etet1919's Avatar
    Join Date: Sep 2018
    Posts: 3,867
    Rep Power: 41272
    etet1919 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) etet1919 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) etet1919 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) etet1919 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) etet1919 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) etet1919 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) etet1919 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) etet1919 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) etet1919 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) etet1919 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) etet1919 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000)
    etet1919 is offline
    Originally Posted by rereeea View Post
    The study says that when volume is equated then training a muscle once a week is the same as training it 3 times a week or even more.

    That's the problem, everytime they mention equal volume, it's a strong point to be taken into consideration.

    It's way easier to do 5 sets of bench press spread on 3 days than doing 15 sets of bench press in one day if it's even possible.

    To make equal volume feasible for the people in the experiment they started off with small volumes. But when training once a week it is difficult to achieve decent volume (20 sets or more) but when training 3 or more times a week then doing 20 sets or more spread across the week is pretty easy and shouldn't take more than 1 hour of working out.

    Also Bret contreras in the podcast with Jeff Nippard mentions a study showing that for people who train a muscle group only once a week it is overkill to do more than 6 sets per session and causes muscle loss, the study was 6 months long.

    But many studies show that when volume is spread evenly across the week, then muscle loss doesn't happen but instead greater volumes only grant greater muscular growth. See norwegien frequency project and all the studies done by Brad Schoenfeld and Krieger.
    Very interesting! Your point (from the results of the studies) about sets being spread out equally across the week to ensure recovery and efficiency is common sense. I'm going to look up this Norweigen frequency project regarding muscle loss while training for volume once per week. I'm not saying I doubt the studies. The only thing I would question is, if a person using this method is gaining strength in their lifts and has gained some mass and definition, then wouldn't it be a sign that the parameter (frequency of volume) has been or is working?
    Reply With Quote

  8. #8
    **** Joe Biden keyboardworkout's Avatar
    Join Date: Jul 2009
    Posts: 22,555
    Rep Power: 262736
    keyboardworkout has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) keyboardworkout has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) keyboardworkout has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) keyboardworkout has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) keyboardworkout has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) keyboardworkout has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) keyboardworkout has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) keyboardworkout has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) keyboardworkout has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) keyboardworkout has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) keyboardworkout has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000)
    keyboardworkout is offline
    To summarize:

    3 sets of 10 done one day a week = 1 set of 10 done 3 times a week
    ▪█─────█▪ Equipment Crew #53 ▪█─────█▪
    ^^^^^^ 6' 6" and Over Crew ^^^^^^
    The protected need to be protected from the unprotected by forcing the unprotected to use the protection that didn’t protect the protected.
    Part of the control group in the COVID-19 vaccine experiment.
    Reply With Quote

  9. #9
    Registered User GeneralSerpant's Avatar
    Join Date: Feb 2011
    Location: United States
    Posts: 17,316
    Rep Power: 64806
    GeneralSerpant has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) GeneralSerpant has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) GeneralSerpant has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) GeneralSerpant has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) GeneralSerpant has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) GeneralSerpant has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) GeneralSerpant has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) GeneralSerpant has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) GeneralSerpant has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) GeneralSerpant has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) GeneralSerpant has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000)
    GeneralSerpant is offline
    Originally Posted by rereeea View Post
    The study says that when volume is equated then training a muscle once a week is the same as training it 3 times a week or even more.

    That's the problem, everytime they mention equal volume, it's a strong point to be taken into consideration.

    It's way easier to do 5 sets of bench press spread on 3 days than doing 15 sets of bench press in one day if it's even possible.

    To make equal volume feasible for the people in the experiment they started off with small volumes. But when training once a week it is difficult to achieve decent volume (20 sets or more) but when training 3 or more times a week then doing 20 sets or more spread across the week is pretty easy and shouldn't take more than 1 hour of working out.

    Also Bret contreras in the podcast with Jeff Nippard mentions a study showing that for people who train a muscle group only once a week it is overkill to do more than 6 sets per session and causes muscle loss, the study was 6 months long.

    But many studies show that when volume is spread evenly across the week, then muscle loss doesn't happen but instead greater volumes only grant greater muscular growth. See norwegien frequency project and all the studies done by Brad Schoenfeld and Krieger.
    15 sets of one exercise in one day yeah, but a lot of people will do different exercises to hit the mark for the given muscle.
    Nothing but clean foods in my diet.
    Reply With Quote

  10. #10
    MAGA Orlando1234977's Avatar
    Join Date: Jun 2006
    Location: Wisconsin, United States
    Posts: 13,670
    Rep Power: 83108
    Orlando1234977 has a brilliant future. Third best rank! (+40000) Orlando1234977 has a brilliant future. Third best rank! (+40000) Orlando1234977 has a brilliant future. Third best rank! (+40000) Orlando1234977 has a brilliant future. Third best rank! (+40000) Orlando1234977 has a brilliant future. Third best rank! (+40000) Orlando1234977 has a brilliant future. Third best rank! (+40000) Orlando1234977 has a brilliant future. Third best rank! (+40000) Orlando1234977 has a brilliant future. Third best rank! (+40000) Orlando1234977 has a brilliant future. Third best rank! (+40000) Orlando1234977 has a brilliant future. Third best rank! (+40000) Orlando1234977 has a brilliant future. Third best rank! (+40000)
    Orlando1234977 is offline
    Originally Posted by rereeea View Post
    It's way easier to do 5 sets of bench press spread on 3 days than doing 15 sets of bench press in one day if it's even possible.
    I can't do 5 work sets of bench press 3 times a week, but I can certainly do over 15 work sets for chest with a week to recover. Like most experienced lifters. A bit easier to maximize weekly volume when decreasing frequency.
    DR. 3time
    Wisconsin Badgers, Green Bay Packers, Milwaukee Bucks
    ~Cobra Kai Crew~
    Reply With Quote

  11. #11
    Banned rereeea's Avatar
    Join Date: Dec 2018
    Age: 51
    Posts: 19
    Rep Power: 0
    rereeea is on a distinguished road. (+10)
    rereeea is offline
    Originally Posted by Orlando1234977 View Post
    I can't do 5 work sets of bench press 3 times a week, but I can certainly do over 15 work sets for chest with a week to recover. Like most experienced lifters. A bit easier to maximize weekly volume when decreasing frequency.
    Then it's pretty much experience dependant. You are so used to it the that any other way seems harder.

    Cause I never met or heard of a person who thinks doing 15 exercises for one body part to be something "easier"... I mean, it's more than 40 -50 minutes to train one muscle group.
    Last edited by rereeea; 12-19-2018 at 02:17 PM.
    Reply With Quote

  12. #12
    my non-edited 'before'pic etet1919's Avatar
    Join Date: Sep 2018
    Posts: 3,867
    Rep Power: 41272
    etet1919 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) etet1919 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) etet1919 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) etet1919 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) etet1919 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) etet1919 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) etet1919 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) etet1919 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) etet1919 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) etet1919 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) etet1919 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000)
    etet1919 is offline

    Wink

    Originally Posted by rereeea View Post
    Then it's pretty much experience dependant. You are so used to it the that any other way seems harder.

    Cause I never met or heard of a person who thinks doing 15 exercises for one body part to be something "easier"... I mean, it's more than 40 -50 minutes to train one muscle group.
    Nothing is "easy".....just different, maybe.

    Women have different hormones. Wouldn't that come into play?
    Reply With Quote

  13. #13
    Registered User gcoulson's Avatar
    Join Date: Dec 2017
    Age: 51
    Posts: 651
    Rep Power: 6651
    gcoulson is a name known to all. (+5000) gcoulson is a name known to all. (+5000) gcoulson is a name known to all. (+5000) gcoulson is a name known to all. (+5000) gcoulson is a name known to all. (+5000) gcoulson is a name known to all. (+5000) gcoulson is a name known to all. (+5000) gcoulson is a name known to all. (+5000) gcoulson is a name known to all. (+5000) gcoulson is a name known to all. (+5000) gcoulson is a name known to all. (+5000)
    gcoulson is offline
    The problem is that while volume may be equated, intensity often is not.
    Reply With Quote

  14. #14
    my non-edited 'before'pic etet1919's Avatar
    Join Date: Sep 2018
    Posts: 3,867
    Rep Power: 41272
    etet1919 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) etet1919 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) etet1919 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) etet1919 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) etet1919 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) etet1919 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) etet1919 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) etet1919 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) etet1919 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) etet1919 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) etet1919 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000)
    etet1919 is offline
    Originally Posted by gcoulson View Post
    The problem is that while volume may be equated, intensity often is not.
    Oh, man!!! If you saw me in the gym doing my thing, you would not for a second, question my intensity level!!
    Reply With Quote

  15. #15
    NZ Brah Pumpinmirin's Avatar
    Join Date: Oct 2014
    Posts: 3,572
    Rep Power: 14351
    Pumpinmirin is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) Pumpinmirin is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) Pumpinmirin is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) Pumpinmirin is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) Pumpinmirin is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) Pumpinmirin is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) Pumpinmirin is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) Pumpinmirin is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) Pumpinmirin is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) Pumpinmirin is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) Pumpinmirin is a splendid one to behold. (+10000)
    Pumpinmirin is offline
    GVT looking thick solid tight.
    Reply With Quote

  16. #16
    Registered User GeneralSerpant's Avatar
    Join Date: Feb 2011
    Location: United States
    Posts: 17,316
    Rep Power: 64806
    GeneralSerpant has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) GeneralSerpant has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) GeneralSerpant has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) GeneralSerpant has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) GeneralSerpant has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) GeneralSerpant has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) GeneralSerpant has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) GeneralSerpant has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) GeneralSerpant has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) GeneralSerpant has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) GeneralSerpant has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000)
    GeneralSerpant is offline
    I thought Suffolk was a proponent of higher frequency.
    Nothing but clean foods in my diet.
    Reply With Quote

  17. #17
    Moderator SuffolkPunch's Avatar
    Join Date: Jan 2007
    Location: Suffolk, United Kingdom (Great Britain)
    Posts: 53,419
    Rep Power: 1332114
    SuffolkPunch has the mod powerz SuffolkPunch has the mod powerz SuffolkPunch has the mod powerz SuffolkPunch has the mod powerz SuffolkPunch has the mod powerz SuffolkPunch has the mod powerz SuffolkPunch has the mod powerz SuffolkPunch has the mod powerz SuffolkPunch has the mod powerz SuffolkPunch has the mod powerz SuffolkPunch has the mod powerz
    SuffolkPunch is offline
    Originally Posted by GeneralSerpant View Post
    I thought Suffolk was a proponent of higher frequency.
    I'm a proponent of science first and foremost. I like to experiment though and high(ish) frequency seems to suit me personally.
    Reply With Quote

  18. #18
    Registered User GeneralSerpant's Avatar
    Join Date: Feb 2011
    Location: United States
    Posts: 17,316
    Rep Power: 64806
    GeneralSerpant has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) GeneralSerpant has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) GeneralSerpant has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) GeneralSerpant has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) GeneralSerpant has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) GeneralSerpant has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) GeneralSerpant has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) GeneralSerpant has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) GeneralSerpant has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) GeneralSerpant has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) GeneralSerpant has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000)
    GeneralSerpant is offline
    Originally Posted by SuffolkPunch View Post
    I'm a proponent of science first and foremost. I like to experiment though and high(ish) frequency seems to suit me personally.
    For sure, was not trying to weigh in for you.

    Just poking fun at Orlando's assertion.
    Nothing but clean foods in my diet.
    Reply With Quote

  19. #19
    Registered User Ghawk21's Avatar
    Join Date: Dec 2016
    Age: 30
    Posts: 3,042
    Rep Power: 33190
    Ghawk21 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Ghawk21 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Ghawk21 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Ghawk21 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Ghawk21 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Ghawk21 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Ghawk21 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Ghawk21 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Ghawk21 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Ghawk21 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Ghawk21 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000)
    Ghawk21 is offline
    Originally Posted by etet1919 View Post
    Oh, man!!! If you saw me in the gym doing my thing, you would not for a second, question my intensity level!!
    For future reference, intensity in regards to weightlifting is your %1RM. Training at a high intensity means heavier weights, not sweating your arse off/ going all out. Its common for people to come on here and say they train very intensely when in fact they are doing cardio with weights.
    Bench: 365
    Squat: 495
    Deadlift: 535

    Refrigerator Lover
    Reply With Quote

  20. #20
    my non-edited 'before'pic etet1919's Avatar
    Join Date: Sep 2018
    Posts: 3,867
    Rep Power: 41272
    etet1919 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) etet1919 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) etet1919 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) etet1919 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) etet1919 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) etet1919 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) etet1919 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) etet1919 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) etet1919 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) etet1919 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) etet1919 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000)
    etet1919 is offline

    Smile

    Originally Posted by Ghawk21 View Post
    For future reference, intensity in regards to weightlifting is your %1RM. Training at a high intensity means heavier weights, not sweating your arse off/ going all out. Its common for people to come on here and say they train very intensely when in fact they are doing cardio with weights.
    I'm going to take a chance and ask if you think I'm "doing cardio with weights" because I'm a woman...lol..? JK. How can you assume what weights I'm actually lifting without asking me? You guys ask the men!!! Why not me?
    Reply With Quote

  21. #21
    Registered User Ghawk21's Avatar
    Join Date: Dec 2016
    Age: 30
    Posts: 3,042
    Rep Power: 33190
    Ghawk21 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Ghawk21 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Ghawk21 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Ghawk21 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Ghawk21 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Ghawk21 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Ghawk21 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Ghawk21 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Ghawk21 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Ghawk21 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Ghawk21 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000)
    Ghawk21 is offline
    Originally Posted by etet1919 View Post
    I'm going to take a chance and ask if you think I'm "doing cardio with weights" because I'm a woman...lol..? JK. How can you assume what weights I'm actually lifting without asking me? You guys ask the men!!! Why not me?
    Sorry, bad wording. Not directed at you specifically. It was in regards to the post you commented on where even if volume was equated, intensity would not be. Example, person benching 3x5 twice a week vs some one benching 6x5 once per week. Intensity wise, its likely the person who did 6x5 would need to train with less intensity (lighter weight) even though they complete the same number of reps as the person who split it into 2 sessions.
    Bench: 365
    Squat: 495
    Deadlift: 535

    Refrigerator Lover
    Reply With Quote

  22. #22
    Moderator SuffolkPunch's Avatar
    Join Date: Jan 2007
    Location: Suffolk, United Kingdom (Great Britain)
    Posts: 53,419
    Rep Power: 1332114
    SuffolkPunch has the mod powerz SuffolkPunch has the mod powerz SuffolkPunch has the mod powerz SuffolkPunch has the mod powerz SuffolkPunch has the mod powerz SuffolkPunch has the mod powerz SuffolkPunch has the mod powerz SuffolkPunch has the mod powerz SuffolkPunch has the mod powerz SuffolkPunch has the mod powerz SuffolkPunch has the mod powerz
    SuffolkPunch is offline
    Originally Posted by GeneralSerpant View Post
    For sure, was not trying to weigh in for you.

    Just poking fun at Orlando's assertion.
    Well it seems it makes no odds having a preference for once a week. But there are other experienced lifters who take the opposing view - i.e. find it easier to do more volume when spreading it out. They find that the 'quality' of the work is generally higher because of doing more sets from fresh (this was mentioned in the paper).

    Also, I speculate that you adapt to your preferred training style. It would be difficult to re-acclimatise to other styles but I think anyone could do it if persistent.
    Reply With Quote

  23. #23
    my non-edited 'before'pic etet1919's Avatar
    Join Date: Sep 2018
    Posts: 3,867
    Rep Power: 41272
    etet1919 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) etet1919 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) etet1919 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) etet1919 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) etet1919 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) etet1919 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) etet1919 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) etet1919 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) etet1919 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) etet1919 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) etet1919 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000)
    etet1919 is offline
    Originally Posted by Ghawk21 View Post
    Sorry, bad wording. Not directed at you specifically. It was in regards to the post you commented on where even if volume was equated, intensity would not be. Example, person benching 3x5 twice a week vs some one benching 6x5 once per week. Intensity wise, its likely the person who did 6x5 would need to train with less intensity (lighter weight) even though they complete the same number of reps as the person who split it into 2 sessions.
    I can understand that concept- especially with BB benching AND with men performing all strongman lifts. For me, personally, I'd rather do the once "equated" weekly volume for upper body parts (brah split) to "lay off " my elbow joints. In the past, obviously I'd split volume into two sessions, but the frequency became hard on those joints. My knees can handle twice a week- go figure...maybe because my knee ligaments are much stronger (not being sarcastic).

    Regarding these studies, those scientists do state the frequency is less important than the ability to go to or close enough to failure. And whether you're a man or woman, using the weights that bring you to failure, is never "not intense enough," within any given rep range. That's what I learned here.
    Reply With Quote

  24. #24
    Registered User Ghawk21's Avatar
    Join Date: Dec 2016
    Age: 30
    Posts: 3,042
    Rep Power: 33190
    Ghawk21 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Ghawk21 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Ghawk21 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Ghawk21 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Ghawk21 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Ghawk21 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Ghawk21 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Ghawk21 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Ghawk21 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Ghawk21 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Ghawk21 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000)
    Ghawk21 is offline
    Originally Posted by etet1919 View Post

    And whether you're a man or woman, using the weights that bring you to failure, is never "not intense enough," within any given rep range. That's what I learned here.
    Not true, you could reach failure or near failure, with a 2lb dumbbell if you do enough reps. That doesn't mean it was intense. Nothing to do with men vs women its just terminology in regards to lifting weights.
    Bench: 365
    Squat: 495
    Deadlift: 535

    Refrigerator Lover
    Reply With Quote

  25. #25
    Banned rereeea's Avatar
    Join Date: Dec 2018
    Age: 51
    Posts: 19
    Rep Power: 0
    rereeea is on a distinguished road. (+10)
    rereeea is offline
    Originally Posted by etet1919 View Post
    I can understand that concept- especially with BB benching AND with men performing all strongman lifts. For me, personally, I'd rather do the once "equated" weekly volume for upper body parts (brah split) to "lay off " my elbow joints. In the past, obviously I'd split volume into two sessions, but the frequency became hard on those joints. My knees can handle twice a week- go figure...maybe because my knee ligaments are much stronger (not being sarcastic).
    Leaving aside the sex difference in training between men and women which are minimal.
    You should see a doctor, i used to have elbow and shoulder pain and I tought it was because of too many rows and curls. But my doctor said it has nothing to do with my training, but I had a (gut) infection that caused my body to react in a havoc and destroy some proteins in my joints, took some antibiotics, changed my diet as suggested by my doctor and the pain went away.
    Reply With Quote

  26. #26
    my non-edited 'before'pic etet1919's Avatar
    Join Date: Sep 2018
    Posts: 3,867
    Rep Power: 41272
    etet1919 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) etet1919 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) etet1919 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) etet1919 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) etet1919 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) etet1919 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) etet1919 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) etet1919 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) etet1919 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) etet1919 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) etet1919 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000)
    etet1919 is offline
    Originally Posted by Ghawk21 View Post
    Not true, you could reach failure or near failure, with a 2lb dumbbell if you do enough reps. That doesn't mean it was intense. Nothing to do with men vs women its just terminology in regards to lifting weights.
    True, I think.....I've never used 5 lbs. In those regards, I get lactic acid burn just holding my arms up to blow dry my hair. Does that mean I will get a huge pump and develop my girlie guns?
    Last edited by etet1919; 12-21-2018 at 02:57 AM. Reason: typo
    Reply With Quote

  27. #27
    MAGA Orlando1234977's Avatar
    Join Date: Jun 2006
    Location: Wisconsin, United States
    Posts: 13,670
    Rep Power: 83108
    Orlando1234977 has a brilliant future. Third best rank! (+40000) Orlando1234977 has a brilliant future. Third best rank! (+40000) Orlando1234977 has a brilliant future. Third best rank! (+40000) Orlando1234977 has a brilliant future. Third best rank! (+40000) Orlando1234977 has a brilliant future. Third best rank! (+40000) Orlando1234977 has a brilliant future. Third best rank! (+40000) Orlando1234977 has a brilliant future. Third best rank! (+40000) Orlando1234977 has a brilliant future. Third best rank! (+40000) Orlando1234977 has a brilliant future. Third best rank! (+40000) Orlando1234977 has a brilliant future. Third best rank! (+40000) Orlando1234977 has a brilliant future. Third best rank! (+40000)
    Orlando1234977 is offline
    Originally Posted by GeneralSerpant View Post
    For sure, was not trying to weigh in for you.

    Just poking fun at Orlando's assertion.
    Pretty easy to make a solid case for either. Remember, Defiant1 would always debate for high frequency until ~2005/6.. since then he did BP splits, once a week frequency.
    DR. 3time
    Wisconsin Badgers, Green Bay Packers, Milwaukee Bucks
    ~Cobra Kai Crew~
    Reply With Quote

  28. #28
    Registered User bLinkMoore's Avatar
    Join Date: Aug 2015
    Location: Bayside, California, United States
    Age: 21
    Posts: 1,362
    Rep Power: 13688
    bLinkMoore is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) bLinkMoore is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) bLinkMoore is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) bLinkMoore is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) bLinkMoore is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) bLinkMoore is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) bLinkMoore is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) bLinkMoore is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) bLinkMoore is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) bLinkMoore is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) bLinkMoore is a splendid one to behold. (+10000)
    bLinkMoore is offline
    I forget where I first read a study like this--NCBI probably--and it made such a difference in my approach to training.

    Realizing that weekly sets was far more important than weekly frequency made it so much easier to put together a solid workout split. Short, intense workouts that last at MOST 45 minutes, done two or three times a week depending on the body part, is so much easier to adhere to than like a two and a half hour leg day or something like that.
    BP: 275
    SQ: 415
    DL: 515
    Bodyweight 170
    Reply With Quote

  29. #29
    oof Vampirelol's Avatar
    Join Date: Jun 2013
    Posts: 3,858
    Rep Power: 40100
    Vampirelol has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Vampirelol has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Vampirelol has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Vampirelol has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Vampirelol has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Vampirelol has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Vampirelol has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Vampirelol has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Vampirelol has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Vampirelol has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Vampirelol has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000)
    Vampirelol is offline
    Imagine that. Busting your ass day in and out, assuming nutrition is in line with your goals, will always yield progress.

    Too many frauds spilling bullchit for profit
    Views expressed on this domain are fictitious and represent the opinion of no entity whatsoever
    Reply With Quote

  30. #30
    Registered User GeneralSerpant's Avatar
    Join Date: Feb 2011
    Location: United States
    Posts: 17,316
    Rep Power: 64806
    GeneralSerpant has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) GeneralSerpant has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) GeneralSerpant has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) GeneralSerpant has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) GeneralSerpant has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) GeneralSerpant has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) GeneralSerpant has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) GeneralSerpant has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) GeneralSerpant has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) GeneralSerpant has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) GeneralSerpant has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000)
    GeneralSerpant is offline
    Originally Posted by SuffolkPunch View Post
    Well it seems it makes no odds having a preference for once a week. But there are other experienced lifters who take the opposing view - i.e. find it easier to do more volume when spreading it out. They find that the 'quality' of the work is generally higher because of doing more sets from fresh (this was mentioned in the paper).

    Also, I speculate that you adapt to your preferred training style. It would be difficult to re-acclimatise to other styles but I think anyone could do it if persistent.
    Originally Posted by Orlando1234977 View Post
    Pretty easy to make a solid case for either. Remember, Defiant1 would always debate for high frequency until ~2005/6.. since then he did BP splits, once a week frequency.
    I like once a week for the long resting period. And it's easier to pile a bunch of exercises into one day.

    Twice a week isn't that bad though 'cause I can still get a bit more volume in with 2 days rest. Technically my weeks are 6 days 'cause of rotation.
    Nothing but clean foods in my diet.
    Reply With Quote

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts